What started the financial crisis in Greece?

The Greek financial crisis has been one of the most important stories of the summer, but it’s also one of the most complicated. How did they end up in such crippling debt? Why did the European Union offer a deal to Greece that doesn’t offer a way for them to restructure their debt? And how are the people in Greece handling the ongoing problem...and what happens next?

TheBlaze's Dan Andros and Jason Buttrill explained the crisis on Wednesday's Glenn Beck Program:

Below is a rough transcript of this segment:

Dan: Hey, Dan Andros here, head writer for TheBlaze, along with Jason Buttrill, chief researcher here at TheBlaze. Greece is just a big, fat mess, and so we’re just going to go through and try to explain it for you really quick. Basically here’s the situation, Greece defaulted. We all saw that in a news, and they went to go vote on an austerity bailout package, and they voted against it. They wanted to keep their goodies, and they didn’t want anything to do with that, so they voted against it. The Greek PM goes back in and ends up taking a deal, so now everyone’s kind of scratching their heads, they don’t really understand what’s going on. So, we’re going to go through and try to explain it in just a quick couple steps. First step, easy way to understand it, the 2008 subprime crisis.

Jason: 2008 subprime mortgage crisis is basically what kicked off this global financial pandemic. During the subprime mortgage crisis, we had irresponsible lenders and irresponsible borrowers, so basically you had people applying for loans that had no business applying for those loans, but the lenders had no business even issuing those loans in the first place. They were loans that eventually since they had adjustable rates, they were going to continue to go up and up and up, so these people had no chance of ever paying these loans off.

Dan: Right, and they didn’t care. They saw the quick buck, so they didn’t care. They just went for it.

Jason: Exactly, and the lenders saw dollar signs and dollar signs that were going to continue to come and continue to come, and if they didn’t, they would just go bankrupt anyway. Back in 2010, during the first bailout, Greece had a national debt of 130% more than their GDP. Put that into perspective. So, let’s say you are making $2000 a month. Now, what if you had bills that were more than 2000 a month? There’s no way you’d qualify for a loan. No lender in their right mind would grant you a loan, but the EU and the IMF granted those loans to Greece.

Dan: And they had no chance of paying it back.

Jason: They had no chance of paying that back. So, basically Greece was that 2008 loan applicant that wanted something so badly that they didn’t care about what the ramifications were down the line. They figured we’ll get around to it later. The EU were those irresponsible lenders that were willing to make that loan because they knew that there was no chance that person would ever be able to get out of debt.

Dan: So, they signed this debt deal, so what does this thing actually do?

Jason: Basically he went completely reverse on what he asked his people to do. He asked his people to forget the deal, the austerity deals, to begin with and to move forward so he could upend the system so they could eventually leave the euro and leave the European Union altogether. He made this deal that fully gave up controls to their banks, fully gave up control. Now, specifically Germans, but members of the EU, they can make decisions on whether to close banks, whether to grant loans, how to adjust their interest rates, everything. They make all of those calls basically from Berlin.

Dan: So, basically what’s happened here is they’ve lost a choose chunk of sovereignty. Basically Germany is their daddy, and they get to do whatever they want to do to them. So, they know they can’t pay off this debt. They know they can’t pay it off, so all it’s about is control.

Jason: They’ve lost the ability to say how do we run our government? They could actually tell them we don’t like how you use the Parthenon and how you tie that to the government with tourism. We want to own that’s, so actually we’re privatizing that and taking it over. Imagine the Parthenon being owned by a German company from Berlin. That is now completely possible, and the Greeks can’t say a thing about it.

Greece is now on the verge of becoming a straight up occupied country, occupied by the European Union. Talk about never being able to repay this debt, the IMF straight up came out and said that there’s no way the Greeks will ever be able to pay off this debt. They can’t do it. So, if they continue along these current lines, they’ll never be able to pay it off. The only way they said is if they restructure the deal, but they didn’t restructure the deal. That was not a part of this new deal that the Greek Prime Minister agreed to. Restructuring was not in it.

The only way they can do it is if they restructure it, so why would the European Union offer a deal basically that doesn’t give them an out, that doesn’t give them a way to eventually pay off their debt? Just like we said, it’s all about control. It’s all about the EU, German, more specifically, tentacles going further and further into some of these countries, countries that cannot pay off their debts, and now they’re occupied.

Dan: So, how do the people there in Greece feel about it? I think what many here in the states don’t understand is the mentality of the people in Greece. I mean, they just had an election, and the people they voted in, you hear often that it’s austerity and that it’s these right-wingers, but they’re not really right-wingers at all.

Jason: The people of Greece, the way they feel about it is they’re tired of it. Now, again, as we’ve said, they’re just as at fault as the EU is, the people that they’re blaming on this. But they wanted to upend the system, so what did they do? They went and voted in a party, the Syriza Party, that they thought was going to upend that system, that was finally going to say no more, we’re not going to go along with what the EU wants anymore, we’re going to do our own thing. So, they voted in the Syriza Party. Who exactly is the Syriza Party? Who did they give the mandate to do this?

They’re all malice. They’re Marxist-Leninists. They’re communists. They knew they voted in the people that had the ability and had the same mentality that was going to start a revolution, and it’s all about revolution. Since the days of the Soviet Union, that’s always been the goal of this type of government is to start a revolution here, and from there it’s going to spread like wildfire. We’ve actually seen that tinder spreading through the rest of the EU.

Dan: So, now we’ve got a bunch of revolutionaries here in power, and this is like their dream scenario. They’re hoping to get out of there, abandon their debts, and basically hit the restart button.

Jason: And that has huge consequences. If the rest of Europe all of a sudden has a restart button and they can just have all of their debt restructured, what does that say to the lenders? What does that do to basically Germany? What does that say to countries like that? They’re now stuck with all of these unpaid debts.

Now that these countries are considering departing from the EU, will we see a rebirth of nationalism? That’s what the European Union was formed to get away from, but now that that’s all coming down and the dominoes are about to start falling and more and more countries are going to look for that same out that Greece is now about to take, will we see a rebirth of nationalism? Will the old days of Europe, the 1930s era of Europe, will that suddenly become our reality?

Dan: Only time will tell, but as the times get tougher and people’s backs get pushed up against the wall, we’re going to see the answer sooner than later.

Featured Image: The Euro logo is pictured in front of the former headquarter of the European Central Bank (ECB) in Frankfurt am Main, western Germany, on July 20, 2015 as Greece has begun making a 4.2 billion euro ($4.6 billion) payment due to the ECB as well as outstanding sums due to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) according to a ministerial source. The transfer was made possible by a short-term "bridge" loan of 7.16 billion euros granted by the European Union on July 17, 2015. Photo credit should read DANIEL ROLAND/AFP/Getty Images

On the radio program Monday, Glenn Beck, Stu Burguiere, and Pat Gray discussed the Trump defense team's arguments in the Senate impeachment trial against President Donald Trump.

"This is different than what the Democrats were doing," Glenn said of the Trump team's impeachment defense. "We know the case of the Democrats, they just kept going over and over and over, for three days, the same stuff. The Republicans, at least on Saturday, did not ... and I thought it was really, really good."

Glenn added, "The president's defense was very compelling."

Watch the videos below to hear Glenn's top takeaways from the president's defense team:

Part 1: Why the president's defense is 'very compelling'

Part 2: Top takeaways from president's impeachment defense

Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Americans are getting crushed by healthcare costs. In 2018 alone, we spent $3.6 trillion on healthcare — that's more than $11,000 per American and nearly a fifth of the national Gross Domestic Product (GDP). It's on everyone's minds, which is why it has taken center stage in the Democratic party's primary. Of course, the solutions offered by the current crop of presidential candidates would do nothing to help alleviate that enormous spending. In fact, it would only add to it — what with Bernie Sanders' Medicare for All and Joe Biden's proposed ObamaCare expansion.

However, what also deserves attention in discussions about plans that increase the government's role in health care is how religious organizations would be affected. Faith-based hospitals and health care sharing ministries (HCSMs) play an important role in America, often serving as a critical provider and/or facilitator of payments for medical services in many states. If plans like Medicare for All were implemented, these groups would be at risk of going bankrupt or being severely curtailed due to the elimination of choice that comes with these proposals.

Instead of imposing a top-down and expensive health care system overhaul, faith-based providers and groups should be allowed to continue offering a variety of plans that work as high-quality, often cheaper alternatives. And more Americans should consider them.

Instead of imposing a top-down and expensive health care system overhaul, faith-based providers and groups should be allowed to continue offering a variety of plans that work as high-quality, often cheaper alternatives.

As mentioned, one such option is a health care sharing ministry. In this model, individuals contribute money into a pool managed by a religiously or ethically-affiliated organization, and costs for medical treatment are shared by people who adhere to that organization's belief system. Typically, applicants are required to sign a statement of faith in order to be accepted. It's basically like a subscription service: consumers pay a set amount of money into the ministry every month. Then, when they have a medical need or incident, they submit a claim to the ministry. Members whose claims are approved are reimbursed by the ministry from that pool of funds. Note, these ministries don't cover procedures they deem immoral.

Because providers are often getting paid in cash under this model — and typically within 90 days — patients are able to negotiate significant discounts, in some cases slicing procedures' costs to a fraction of the initial price. Insurance companies, by comparison, tend to not pay dollar for dollar on claims, and certainly not in cash. Additionally, insurance companies usually have onerous paperwork requirements, forcing doctors to spend half of their time on electronic health records and desk work. This increase in demand for administrative work is partly responsible for the United States leading the world in administrative costs in healthcare.

There are various types of HCSMs, each offering different benefits depending on what the individual needs — and a lot of savings on monthly plans. Take Christian Healthcare Ministries, for example. It's resulted in enormous savings for its members. Whereas the average healthcare plan can cost about $400 a month on the low end (with high deductibles), CHM plans can run between $78-172 a month for a single person. These kinds of plans are particularly great options for people who are relatively healthy and young, where the need for doctors and prescription drugs is less likely.

HCSMs have seen explosive growth in popularity recently. In 2014, there were only approximately 160,000 members. By 2018, membership ballooned to about 1 million HCSM members around the United States who have shared over $1 billion in medical expenses. But unfortunately, many people still feel locked into the traditional — and expensive — health care insurance model. HCSMs provide a way out, and, depending on their belief system, people should research them and see if there's one that best suit their needs. If more people deviate away from the traditional health care insurance market, insurance companies would be incentivized to adjust their pricing. That won't be possible, of course, if plans like Medicare for All are implemented.

Health care is one of life's biggest expenses, and voters are understandably desperate for a plan that cuts costs without compromising quality of care or access to it. Alternative options to health care insurance such as HCSMs are practical, free-market solutions that saves money. Americans should sift through these options before subscribing to plans that will only break the bank.

James Czerniawski is a Young Voices contributor. Follow him on Twitter @JamesCz19.

Bill O'Reilly: Adam Schiff is in 'wonderland' during the Senate impeachment trial

Image source: BlazeTV video screen save

On the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Friday, Bill O'Reilly gave his latest take on the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump, and explained why he thinks House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) is like "Alice in Wonderland."

Watch the video below to catch more of the conversation:

youtu.be


Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program Friday to discuss the latest developments in the Senate impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.

According to Cruz, Thursday was a "very consequential day" in the otherwise tedious and redundant impeachment proceedings.

"Yesterday, the House managers effectively threw Joe Biden under the bus," Cruz said. "They doubled down on what they started doing on the first day of arguments, which was making their entire case ... based on the proposition that there was zero evidence to justify investigating Burisma [the Ukrainian natural gas company that paid then-Vice President Joe Biden's son, Hunter, $50,000 a month to sit on the board]."

Cruz went on to explain that every time the Democrats, namely House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), rehash the "zero-evidence" argument, they open the door for Republicans to present the overwhelming evidence that contradicts those claims.

"That proposition, that there's zero evidence to investigate Burisma, is utterly and completely absurd. So, I'm looking forward to Saturday when the president's lawyers will begin presenting his case. Because what the Democrats have done, is they have opened the door to this. And I hope the president's lawyers will stand up and systematically lay out the case," Cruz said.

"They've been arguing that Hunter Biden is completely irrelevant to this case. Well, the House managers have now, through their arguments, made Hunter Biden not only relevant — he was always relevant — but critical now," he continued. "They built the entire case, like a house of cards, on the proposition that there was no reasonable basis to investigate Burisma. And that's just absurd."

The two also discussed Cruz's new podcast, "Verdict with Ted Cruz," which he records with Daily Wire host Michael Knowles each night following the Senate trial.

"Last night's podcast went through systematically ... all of the overwhelming evidence of corruption from Burisma that any president, not only had the authority to investigate, but the responsibility to investigate," Cruz said. "And that, ultimately, is why President Trump is going to be acquitted at the end of this process."

Watch the video below for more details:

Use code BECK to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.